Google’s Chrome OS to arrive on hardware “later this fall”

Google plans to officially release Chrome OS in the fall, saying that it is …

Google vice president of product management Sundar Pichai announced that the company's browser-centric operating system will be released this fall. Chrome OS is built on top of the Ubuntu Linux distribution, but uses a completely custom user interface based on Google's Chrome Web browser.

The announcement was made at the Computex conference in Taipei where hardware makers are unveiling a multitude of new tablet and netbook products. Pichai reportedly said that Google is working on bringing the first Chrome OS device to market.

"We are working on bringing the device later this fall," Pichai said, according to a report by AFP. "We expect it to reach millions of users on day one."

Google's Chrome Web browser recently dropped its beta label on Linux with the release of Chrome 5, the first official stable release that is supported across Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X. The browser's increasingly rich feature set and excellent performance make it a good choice for netbooks, the market at which Chrome OS is squarely aimed.

The big question is whether Chrome OS will also be ready for tablets when it is launched later this year. Existing Android tablet prototypes have a lot of rough edges and seem to suggest that Google's phone operating system is not be a good choice for the larger tablet form factor. It's possible that Google will encourage hardware makers to use Chrome OS instead of Android on tablet devices, and we have already seen some evidence that Google and its partners are working on ARM and Tegra 2 support for the platform.

The concept of a browser-centric operating system is intriguing, but there are still some challenges that have to be overcome. According to Google, one of the biggest issues is application discoverability. During the recent Google I/O conference, the company announced plans for a Web-based application store that will make it easy for users to find and purchase access to Web software. The store will be integrated with Chrome OS, allowing users to "install" Web application launchers onto the new tab screen. Google has also developed a novel "cloud printing" system so that users will be able to print over the Internet from Chrome OS devices.

The official launch of Chrome OS has some significant ramifications. It will push Google into the platform market, where the company will compete with rival Microsoft. Like other Linux-based platforms, Chrome OS will be available for free, allowing hardware vendors to avoid licensing costs.

34 Reader Comments

ChromeOS _was_ build on top of Ubuntu. (Ubuntu is just called Ubuntu, not Ubuntu Linux)But Google soon dropped most of the Debian build stuff and is now using Gentoos Portage to build ChromeOS. So ChromeOS is now very custom build and not really compatible to anything else.

Android on tablets is a given. If the current browser shows rough edges they'll improve the browser or even just port chrome like they did with the google tv system.

I'm really interested to see how far chrome os goes... and how it and android will differentiate into verticals of the market... my opinion: chrome os on low end touch devices and cheap tablets and android taking the upper end. I keep thinking that the chrome os will be an ideal system for 'embedded' screens on appliances... where the full function of android is overkill but the appliance maker wants 'web enabled' functionality. Appliance maker could quickly put its own hooks into the linux stack to make 'smart' appliances.

As long as Chrome OS is still just a small Linux install with nothing but a web browser, I will continue to view it with contempt. If I really wanted that I could just install my own favorite Linux distro on a netbook and then configure it to run chrome when it boots up, its really nothing special.

this will not work. They are artificially limiting feature sets because of some ideology? I mean at least Apple only does this with small fry like flash support. The Google guys have removed applications alltogether. (Yeah I know web apps with Gears for offline support urgs)

I think they are missing that many many people still use their mobile devices without internet for a long time. Because of price, because of mobile internet availability, in flights, during vacations ... Apps are a solution to the problem that data connections are not always available. And this will be the case for a long time.

So ChromeOS will not win out. A polished Tablet Android on the other hand has a much better chance.

Yet another Linux distribution, that will fail to compete against Microsoft on the desktop.

I think just that Google try to attack it by attacking the sides. Google Summer of Code contribute mostly to Linux projects, and at large the improvements there get all along the way. The point is that Apple and Microsoft is mostly on high end PC, and Google attacks it on low end devices. It is a good policy? I honestly think that MS may lose a good part of the netbook OS but the Win7 installations on anything more than 400 dollars/euro laptops and desktops will not be at risk.The single risk I found for Microsoft is the culture that Chrome OS brings: you just need a browser for your basic stuff, so your OS is not that important. This is also dubbed by the ubiquity of the netbooks, that are cheap and will be even more easier to get.

Why do people keep speculating that Chrome OS will go to tablets? It's not touch designed, it doesn't really need touch, it's (mostly) the web. Android is the touch based OS, it will stay that way.

Chrome OS will make a great kiosk distribution. I wouldn't be surprised if libraries start using it on college campuses in two years. It will be more lightweight, stable, and integrated than current linux distros that are commonly used.

Also, it is quite likely NaCl will make Chrome OS pretty awesome for online computation and gaming in a few years. Instead of Flash games, we can have native C/C++ code running in a sandboxed environment on any platform.

It will be a sad launch though, not too many people are ready for something like this, but in a few years it will be very relevant and the best.

Google will be the next Microsoft, in terms of the hatred that is received.

Nope, that would be Apple. Because everyone knows the trolls love to call Ars Technica pro-Apple, when it really is unbiased for the most part. If anything, I'd say it's slightly pro-Microsoft, just trolls wouldn't know it because they'd rather see Google or Microsoft destroy Apple apparently and complain about every article that involves Apple and how many articles there are about Apple in comparison to Google or Microsoft (it's really about the same, douchebags). And apparently some people are so great in their hatred of Apple I heard they were playing rumors to make money on shorts on Apple stock

this will not work. They are artificially limiting feature sets because of some ideology? I mean at least Apple only does this with small fry like flash support. The Google guys have removed applications alltogether. (Yeah I know web apps with Gears for offline support urgs)

Google is dumping gears in favour of HTML5 storage techniques, although it will probably suffer from the problem of running into walls where content simply isn't available. Webapps will need to be polished really nicely for this to work.

Apple also managed to dump things like multitasking and it worked fine.

Quote:

I think they are missing that many many people still use their mobile devices without internet for a long time. Because of price, because of mobile internet availability, in flights, during vacations ... Apps are a solution to the problem that data connections are not always available. And this will be the case for a long time.

So ChromeOS will not win out. A polished Tablet Android on the other hand has a much better chance.

HTML 5 offers offline application caching, which is what will likely be leveraged.

It's going to be difficult to polish Android to the same minimal levels as ChromeOS (although I imagine the two projects will merge at some point down the road).

But it misses the point of such a device, it's an internet device, not a replacement desktop OS. It'll be low cost and hopefully will be able to run anything the web has to offer, thus mitigating performance issues. Sit down, press on, start working.

It's also very forward looking. I doubt google expect an overnight success here, but internet connections on planes are becoming more common. If international agreements on wireless contracts could happen, going on holiday would simple mean a small surplus (more like credit cards than the $18,000 bills people manage these days). Web access will become more available, not less, so it makes sense to have the framework in place now. HTML5 isn't finished yet either, but it's what the OS targets.

On the plus side, a Chrome OS tablet would truly be lock-in free, unlike an Android or iPhone OS tablet. Want to change platforms? No problem - all your current apps will still run on the new platform, as long as it has a modern web browser.

I agree kiosk computing is the ideal first target for this.Will have to make some major changes to make it tablet i.e. touch suitable though.

As for netbooks, Meego is looking like the best-in-breed solution - lightning fast, linux based (ergo open) and 95% feature complete - just fix the codecs / NTFS access and I'll even wipe my IBM X60. However Meego is not optimised for touch

Before Google went public, I actually made the prediction that they would build an OS - I even blogged it:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~What will Google do with $20B? - Business - 4/29/2004 8:48:55 AMWhat market will Google attack w/ all their dough?When Google gets their day of glory, their IPO, what will be on their agenda that is not already there now?

They have dozens of pet projects in process at any one time. Some of these will undoubtably be funded to see how they stick to the market.

But what else could Google fund with such a large largess?

Some say that the server is still where the action is. That companies who focus on the server side of systems - the OS's, the apps, the security, the services - that this is what is still in vogue.

I say that the server has had it's day and that it's the desktop once again that will represent the hallmark of technology's revitalization.

And that the Google OS will be the ticket to do just this. Yup, the Google OS. Google will use its billions to develop a googleable OS which superceeds all Microsoft's efforts to build a more useful desktop. A fully indexed, find my information wherever it is stored type of OS.

And it will be free.

And it will eliminate this 10 year old Windows 95'esque interface of Start buttons and cascading menus. And it will be 3D! And it will be secure and fast and easy.

I was initially excited about the idea of Chrome OS, but over the past few months the project seems like an inescapable dud. I don't see the market for this. In the US our Internet bandwidth doesn't really afford us an online-only, cloud-centric computing model in the year 2010. We still need a couple of hundreds of GB for local storage and application use. Not everything can be recreated in a Web App with HTML5/CSS/JavaScript and a server-side scripting language as Google would have you believe. Sure, down the road I'm sure video editing in a browser using open Web technologies will be a reality, but for the immediate future it's still a long ways away and Google seems to be wasting time and resources while they should be focused more on polishing the Android UI and experience for mobile devices.

"As long as Chrome OS is still just a small Linux install with nothing but a web browser, I will continue to view it with contempt. If I really wanted that I could just install my own favorite Linux distro on a netbook and then configure it to run chrome when it boots up, its really nothing special."

Good point. I mean, everyone can just do that, right? Just buy a netbook with nothing on it, install a heavily customised and trimmed Linux distro, and set up a browser-based OS on it. Easy.

"I think they are missing that many many people still use their mobile devices without internet for a long time. Because of price, because of mobile internet availability, in flights, during vacations ... Apps are a solution to the problem that data connections are not always available. And this will be the case for a long time."

You ought to tell Google about this, as they probably haven't even thought about it yet! Why, they'd have to implement some kind of off-line storage/functionality.

"Yet another Linux distribution, that will fail to compete against Microsoft on the desktop."

"Existing Android tablet prototypes have a lot of rough edges and seem to suggest that Google's phone operating system is not be a good choice for the larger tablet form factor."

No, it doesn't suggest that. It's a long way from prototype to full product, which suggests changes will be made to both OS and hardware. That's what it suggests.

++

Just imange if Apple had shown an early prototype of the iPad (which according to latest news was already existing before the iPhone): It would have had tons of rough edges and everybody would have said 'this OS is does not work for tablets'. Every early prototype has rough edges - there is a reason it took apple so long even after the release of the iPhone to show the iPad in public. The big difference is, that apple only shows products they are happy with and never show the half working prototypes. All other companies show early prototypes, no matter in which stage (probably to stay in the news, get early feedback or to show that they are not sitting on their butt while other great products come out), sometimes they don't even make it to a product, sometimes they become a product a little bit to early (which rough edges) and sometimes they become a good product. And also the first generation iPhone OS had some rough edges - software updates can fix rough edges.

That said, I also don't really get the point of Chrome OS - just make a basic install of any OS and fire up the browser in full screen. Maybe I'm missing something, but for me it looks like that ChromeOS is (from the Users point of view) just a webbrowser that 'boots up'

On the plus side, a Chrome OS tablet would truly be lock-in free, unlike an Android or iPhone OS tablet. Want to change platforms? No problem - all your current apps will still run on the new platform, as long as it has a modern web browser.

Actually it looks like you just move the lock in to the Google Cloud. A move that obviously benefits Google.

Essentially it is a return to the mainframe/dumb terminal model. Not one I am interested in. If there is something I really want to keep in the cloud(email), I can just use a web browsers for that activity, but almost everything else I keep both the apps/data locally.

Followed the comments in the original article, someone mentioned Chrome OS requires always on internet.

If I get a tablet, I will be looking to minimize net connections, not maximize and going for a Wifi only model. That is a poor fit for Chrome.

Unless Google is giving away free 3g with their Chrome tablet this looks like a flop, but if they include free 3g, well then they will sell everyone they make. This could be the killer feature.

Someone asked about why people are assuming tablets:Google doesn't currently support/certify Android on tablets.Rumor already had Google working on a tablet.This article has a Google quote: ""We are working on bringing the device later this fall,"

I'm still somewhat puzzled when it comes to ChromeOS's position and relationship when it comes to Android. How can the two co-exist? What benefits does ChromeOS offer when compared to Android?

So, a tablet running ChromeOS would basically be like an iPad that only ran Safari. Why not have Android running there instead?

This confuses me too. ChromeOS was (IIRC) announced first, but Android appears to have caught on fire, from a mindset perspective, so this dual-OS strategy seems almost Microsoftian in its ability to waste resources and distract developers.

Why do people keep speculating that Chrome OS will go to tablets? It's not touch designed, it doesn't really need touch, it's (mostly) the web. Android is the touch based OS, it will stay that way.

Chrome OS will make a great kiosk distribution.

Aren't most kiosks using touch-driven interfaces? Wouldn't Android thus be a better fit than ChromeOS?

Of course not. Android, like iPhone OS, is about personal applications on a mobile touchscreen device connecting you to the world. A kiosk is generally a screen (and in most cases a keyboard) that lets you access a strict amount of features. Kiosks on college campuses are generally old machines that don't do much more than run a web browser. ChromeOS is perfect for that. If you take it offline, you can make an HTML5, Flash, or w/e you like interface on a stable platform. Basic point and click touch could very well be implemented (for the keyboard-less interfaces), but ChromeOS will very likely never be a multi touch OS.

Why do people keep speculating that Chrome OS will go to tablets? It's not touch designed, it doesn't really need touch, it's (mostly) the web. Android is the touch based OS, it will stay that way.

Chrome OS will make a great kiosk distribution.

Aren't most kiosks using touch-driven interfaces? Wouldn't Android thus be a better fit than ChromeOS?

Of course not. Android, like iPhone OS, is about personal applications on a mobile touchscreen device connecting you to the world. A kiosk is generally a screen (and in most cases a keyboard) that lets you access a strict amount of features. Kiosks on college campuses are generally old machines that don't do much more than run a web browser. ChromeOS is perfect for that.

I still don't see how that would exclude Android from also being a good fit, given that it provides essentially a superset of ChromeOS for these situations. (I'm assuming, like the iPad/iPhone, it'll support external physical keyboards but I don't know this to be true.)

When I think of kiosks, I think of things like the redbox DVD rental kiosk, or an ATM, or an airport check-in kiosk or even the wedding/baby registry kiosks at stores like Target or Macy's, most of which are touch-driven - including screen-based touch keyboards! Obviously they're locked-down to perform their specific task, but there's no reason Android would be incapable of that vs. ChromeOS.

It has nothing to do with incompatibility, it's much more about the use factor I think. Sure Android can run on these things and it can be a great shell for multi touch Java interfaces, but as a smartphone platform it comes with all these frameworks and tools to run different applications. The kiosks you are talking about, perhaps, the multi-touch and underlying features of Android would be good, but wouldn't a web interface be easier and faster to write and maintain?

Brad Oliver wrote:

I still don't see how that would exclude Android from also being a good fit, given that it provides essentially a superset of ChromeOS for these situations. (I'm assuming, like the iPad/iPhone, it'll support external physical keyboards but I don't know this to be true.)

I really wouldn't call Android a "superset" of ChromeOS. I see them as rather distinct at the moment. Android is focused on local applications, ChromeOS on web applications. Android runs on appliances, ChromeOS on devices that are meant for the internet and for productivity. Google Docs is one of the key backbones of ChormeOS, something that you don't really use in Android. And I am still waiting to see how people deal with productivity on the new "tablet" factor that has just been introduced.

I was initially excited about the idea of Chrome OS, but over the past few months the project seems like an inescapable dud. I don't see the market for this. In the US our Internet bandwidth doesn't really afford us an online-only, cloud-centric computing model in the year 2010. We still need a couple of hundreds of GB for local storage and application use. Not everything can be recreated in a Web App with HTML5/CSS/JavaScript and a server-side scripting language as Google would have you believe. Sure, down the road I'm sure video editing in a browser using open Web technologies will be a reality, but for the immediate future it's still a long ways away and Google seems to be wasting time and resources while they should be focused more on polishing the Android UI and experience for mobile devices.

You missed the fact that the laptops will have local storage, many gigabytes worth. And you won't need to be connected to the internet to use the applications, even though it is within the browser.